The Bigger Conclusion That Surrounds The Criticism: A reflection essay on Tourism Malaysia 2020 Logo
Malaysian's first reaction when new tourism logo is unveiled
After the M2020 logo was revealed online, uproar from netizens are understandable - multiple bland colours (boring like how we still proud of multiracial when ministers play racial card), gradient fading twin towers (because charisma took away by the new tallest tower in Malaysia), thug 2D graphic animals (as they were run by a lorry after escaping zoo due to bad maintenance), weird slogan (it should be "Enjoy while traveling, respect" then it would sounds so much local).
Though I would propose a better slogan that doesn't require much tweak on the current logo - "Travel.Enjoy.Relak".
It is really that bad, so bad that netizens are coming out with variations of M2020 logo and had launched online petition against the implementation of the logo. So much the hate, however, very few realised that the current MOTAC logo was also designed by one of the same designer - Rosli Hassan. The style looks like logos from the early 2000 which were printed on school textbooks. To be honest, I adore it a lot, it just feels "right".
Confidence level of ministers + reactions from netizens be like...
No matter how bad it is, the new M2020 set a turning point on the local graphic design scene that, Malaysians actually care about design. As uneducated and uninterested in art, most netizen are exposed to hundreds of logos since the digital age arrived. Swipe to unlock phone, we see plenty of application logos nicely laid out on our smartphone homescreen; stuck in traffic jam, we witness the ever-changing advertisement featuring latest Chinese gadgets and local campaign on LED billboards.
People might not notice good design, but they know what is bad
Keyboard warrior tries to speak design, including me
People know what is going on, most of them just don't know how to do it right. At least the previous tourism campaigns are good enough to not spark uproars.
Speaking from designer's point of view, the borderline of "good" and "bad" design is often blurred out due to incomplete design briefs, bad taste of the boss and etc. Therefore, it became an unspoken rule among fellow designers to "play safe" when approaching design. As long as it is nice enough to please the client, then let it be. Hence, the alternative logos by netizen.
Every graphic designer on social media went from peasants to peanut
The notion of creating "play safe" design just to please everyone might also be problematic, because it bores us quickly. The branding for SEA games is not exceptionally great compared to the much more conceptual design level of Olympics game, but it is good enough to generate hype. It answers the brief to be cheerful, and Rimau the mascot played its role well. Able to see our national athletes featured on highway billboard along with SEA games graphic element somehow makes my heart pound a little bit.
Graphic Design Presentation 101
Presenting audience with one single logo is as dangerous as leaving your first born kid in the jungle. Graphic Design Presentation 101 - although great design are self-explanatory, but a little bit of description on logo usage and mockups won't harm.
Some things are better paired with descriptions (except good UXD)
As breakthrough as it is, good logo should not stand alone among other branding efforts (mascot, song, mockups, graphic element). The new Mastercard and Formula One logo will look stupidly effortless, but pair them with long description of design brief and mockup, bam, it works!
The alternative logos became a benchmark of what is "good" logo
And this is certainly untrue. Most alternative logos still have the same visual with the original logo - spotting eco-tourism graphics of floras and faunas, paired with exploding mesh of colours.
Few people I've spoke with during my London trip mentioned about how nice the food is (and the hot weather, I don't think they know Malaysia's infrastructure is not optimised for walkers), meanwhile my China friend mention about MH370 all the time, the rest compare Malaysia with Singapore. None of their concern is displayed on the logo, and minister be like:
Just follow what the geography textbook says about Malaysia!
Good design don't scream like that, and great logos certainly remains a kind of ambiguity that helps with storytelling of the logo. As the great designer Massimo Vignelli points out in his book, the Vignelli Canon:
"Rather than the negative connotation of ambiguity as a form of vagueness, I have a positive interpretation of ambiguity, intended as a plurality of meanings, or the ability of conferring to an object or a design, the possibility of being read in different ways - each one complementary to the other to enrich the subject and give more depth."
Most alternative logos are utterly childish, and very commercial-like. Previous tourism logos are subtle in visual communication, which is great.
If your goal as a designer is to produce a better version of the current M2020 logo, do research before hopping straight onto the screen. Any argument that "alternative designs are not paid, thus no need for research" is invalid, because by doing so, we all degrade the industry by setting unrealistic "good logo" standard.
Malaysian designers either got degraded by businessmen and politicians, or they degrade themselves.
Great logos are not completed in one or two days, unless you are Milton Glaser, who drew the "I ♥ NY" sign in just a few seconds. I wish you all the luck.
Almost impossible to take out a design just because it looks unpleasant
This is just my mere guess - without issues such as copyright infringement, M2020 logo will remain. But, heck, before "One Malaysia" slogan became students' must-write-word on almost every essay, "One Israel" existed. Nothing happened.
Perhaps the only way to make government to take down the logo is to prove to Mr.Nazri that Gorillas have been claimed by other countries.
Relationship between ASEAN countries be like...
Designers are always trapped in a grey zone, knowing that design is just like art - very subjective, yet good design strive for maximum objectivity. It is like playing Knife-Hand game with yourselves all the time, very risky. In graphic design, it feels like you are paid to tarnish your name if things go wrong.
However, if art goes wrong, people will just turn their head and say "well, I don't understand art", not realising that art is same as design in an aspect that, it is very subjective, yet it strives for maximum objectivity (in terms of concept, not aesthetically and visually).
In a Nutty Shell
As passive as it sounds, but there is nothing much we can do about it, and I have nothing much to write here. Don't get me wrong, I'm disappointed with the new logo too, so disappointed that I don't even bother to include it into this post.
Comment what you think we can do so I can elaborate my points.
"I have no intention of changing. We are not going back. It was meant for foreign tourist and not locals. When I launched it in Chiang Mai they liked and praised it,"
- Malaysian Tourism and Culture Minister, Nazri Aziz -
